About Me

Author of "The Most Dangerous Man in America: Rush Limbaugh's Assault on Reason," (limbaughbook.com). Also the author of "Barack Obama: This Improbable Quest" and "President Barack Obama: A More Perfect Union (www.obamapolitics.com), along with "Patriotic Correctness: Academic Freedom and Its Enemies" (www.collegefreedom.org) and "Newt Gingrich: Capitol Crimes and Misdemeanors".

Tuesday, September 13, 2011

Claptrap and Smears about 9/11, 10 Years Later

The American Association of University Professors put out a statement that probably would have made Neville Chamberlain throw up. It promised to "continue to fight violence with renewed dedication to the exercise of freedom of thought and the expression of that freedom in our teaching." What does that mean? That the professors of 1941 should have responded to Pearl Harbor by just logging more class time? Bradford Wilson of the National Association of Scholars, a group that has been struggling to restore intellectual integrity to the campus, called the AAUP statement "fatuous nonsense," "basic Marxist claptrap" and "anti-American in its basic thrust."

John Leo smears the AAUP's immediate response to 9/11 as a statement that "probably would have made Neville Chamberlain throw up." If you look at the actual statement (which was a personal statement by the president and general secretary, not an official statement by the AAUP), it's nothing like that.

Leo wonders about the AAUP's defense of freedom of thought in response to 9/11, "What does that mean? That the professors of 1941 should have responded to Pearl Harbor by just logging more class time?"

What does Leo propose that the professoriate should have done after 9/11? Imprison Muslim in camps? Mount machine guns on the roof of a campus building? Launch a team of professors to seek out and kill Osama bin Laden? Support the invasion of random countries on false pretenses?

It seems perfectly wise that professors (and everyone one) should have responded to the act of irrational mass murder on 9/11 with a commitment to rationality and freedom of thought. Not one word in the AAUP statement suggests that they think the American government should have done nothing in response to the "immense violence" of 9/11--it was strictly limited to what professors ought to do.

The reactionary responses by Leo and Bradford Wilson of the NAS to these reasonable ideas were deplorable, but perhaps understandable considering the wave of fear and anger inspired by 9/11.

But 10 years later, Leo actually seems proud to have falsely smeared the AAUP as "anti-American" because it stood up for freedom of thought after 9/11. Personally, I don't see anything American about attacking the patriotism of people who defend free speech.

1 comment:

I write as the president of the AAUP who signed the statement referred to above, which was drafted by then-General Secretary Mary Burgan. In the days that followed the 9/11 massacres it has received both high praise and vicious opprobrium. Although Professor Burgan deserves the credit for what I still consider to be a perfectly appropriate, rational, yet poetic and and heart-felt response to the horrors of 9/11/01, I signed it enthusiastically. Of course, it is always easy to criticize when lifting a single sentence out of a nuanced context as Mr. Leo has done. Here is the complete statement:

The events of September 11, 2001, have undermined our sense of security in many ways. They are not just violations of our people and of our symbols of power. They are violations of our basic trust in reason. Despite some internal national conflicts, our members have chosen to work within our democracy with a sense that we could make a difference in deciding how to use our great power justly in the world. Although we have been deeply disturbed about injustice, poverty, and inequity and the violence they instigate, we have also harbored a belief that we could find ways to remediate these evils by understanding them. And now the evidence of such immense violence, used so irrationally, has challenged our belief that we could make sense of things to ourselves and to others.

In the presence of such a rebuke to our deepest convictions, it is tempting not to think at all, but to act instinctively. As an association of university professors that is distinctively American, however, we are called by all the elements of our identity to reaffirm our faith in the power of knowledge to hold back the irrational. We therefore affirm, for our colleagues throughout this country, that we will continue to fight violence with renewed dedication to the exercise of freedom of thought and the expression of that freedom in our teaching.